Skip to main content

About your Search

Search Results 0 to 5 of about 6
not endorse the data act. crew endorse the data at, but so did grover norquist. business has to get involved because politicians listen to business. in the area i worked on, companies realize that once the government began publishing information, there are new business models and it will not favor any particular competitive because the same information will be out there for the smallest developer and the largest silicon valley player to use to pursue their own businesses. >> let me just say that we never drank the kool-aid. when have always been pretty aggressive about our views. been pretty critical and we are always pushing for more. -- we have always been pretty critical and we are always pushing for more. we will work with allies where we have them. i have not been mentioned the initial archives and -- i have not mentioned the initial archives and records administration. they are committed to records preservation. they understand we have to find a way to preserve e-mails and their importance. e-mails are the interesting thing is i am always after. those are the smoking gun. the office of
a leadership position. they take an allegiance to grover norquist. give me a break. the allegiance should go to the united states of america were host: is your solution? caller: i would get rid of all of them, that's what i would do, thank you. host: will leave the bear. -- we will leave it there. caller: i have two questions. everybody keeps referring to social security as an entitlement. i paid into that, it is not an entitlement, it is mine. i have not heard any comments about all the people who pay absolutely no taxes at all. i will hang up. thank you. guest: social security qualifies as an entitlement in the sense that is not an annual appropriation. this is a technical term in washington that you get back much more than you put in and you qualify for it because of certain checklists we created wendell: was put together. in that sense, it is an entitlement, not different in medicare. host: here's a quick comment from one of our viewers -- guest: they are unwilling to pull the trigger and make the investments. you can say the problem is conference but we cannot read every business execut
some ideologues, see their ideology tested. grover norquist -- both ways. political forces, wherever their ideology is grounded, as long as the system remains open tand pluralistic, but will be forced -- we see this in indonesia. in 2002, the islamist parties got 41% of the vote. the decline over the last couple of years to about 29%. i believe we are in the early stages of transformation in the middle east. we will talk about that complex competition for power. a final point -- i hope we debated a little bit. it is the issue of u.s. policy. it is my view that two years into this transition in the middle east -- and i avoid calling it arab awakening or arab spring. it is too early to characterize it. we've only seen about four countries, senior leaderships' change. -- seen their leadership's change. how we actually change and adapt and become more nimble, both in terms of how we deal with political islam and all other actors, we need to figure out how to most judiciously engage and offer support to non islamist forces. if you look a the most recent election results in egypt, there is
're in crisis. host: to attend the wednesday meetings of grover norquist? guest: no. host: why not? guest: you have to determine how you'll spend your time. that's not the best use of my time. i think that is something necessary that he does. host: first call for armstrong williams comes from fred in michigan. caller: hi. i have two questions concerning the fiscal cliff. the cash cuts that republicans -- the spending cuts on medicare. why don't we allow them to negotiate medicare and to reduce the cost of medicine? that should save you a lot of money yearly. i agree totally about the republicans and democrats spending money stupidly just before the election. both sides voted to refurbish something like 170 army tanks that the army said they'd do not need. they went and voted to repair those tanks. why are we wasting our money? democrats want to cut taxes. host: armstrong williams? guest: we haven't gotten to affordable care and medicare and medicaid. if affordable care was administered correctly and if he did not have the special interest groups and if tort reform was not included, package you
are in the thrall of grover norquist, it'll be a rough, a long haul. host: what do you make of this process? guest: i loved senator simpson. he is such a wonderful person. i have not met anyone kinder or nicer than him who is willing to work with people on all sides. he is all about listening. people would say gets worse every year in washington. i'm a little bit of a contrarian. there is always tension. there's always a lot of pressure from both sides. what you typically have to have are these kinds of external pressures. that is what is going on today. i think there is a real issue of trust. one of the unique things is i remember the first days, and not just to talk about this. this idea that we kept most of the information within those walls. it built a sense of trust between republicans and democrats so we read able to get 60%. you have to talk to both sides. we do not do enough of that. it is a difference of opinion. the have to find common ground. host: bob is on the line from chapel hill, north carolina. caller: two specific questions. does your trillion dollar increase come from status sco
to spend on. host: do you agree with the grover norquist tax pledge to not raise taxes? caller: in service of the tax rates? yes, i do. i am also left scratching my head because i believe when the bush tax cuts were put into effect that many democrats oppose those as being bad for the economy. yet, and now, they are running around saying we cannot let the rates go back to the talks rates that we set up under president clinton -- the tax rates go back. what let's stick out with came out yesterday from the republicans. they want to bring in new revenue from tax reform, $800 billion being their calculations. do you agree with some who say that is increasing taxes? caller: yes and no. it depends. i would agree with that form of tax revenue increase if it went with spendingd reductions. host: that is where you see compromise? caller: we have been through this before. i have friends that frequently site back in reagan's presidency that president reagan increased taxes, but he did that as a consequence of an agreement with the democratic leadership with the democratic leadership
Search Results 0 to 5 of about 6